30
$\begingroup$

Let $p_n$ be the $n$th degree polynomial that sends $\frac{k(k-1)}{2}$ to $\frac{k(k+1)}{2}$ for $k=1,2,...,n+1$. E.g., $p_2(x) = (6+13x -x^2)/6$ is the unique quadratic polynomial $p(x)$ satisfying $p(0) = 1$, $p(1) = 3$, and $p(3) = 6$. Then it appears that $p_n(x)-x$ always has precisely one negative real root, and moreover this root (as a function of $n$) appears to approach $-0.577$ as $n$ gets large. Do these roots indeed approach a limit, and is this limit indeed the negative of the Euler-Mascheroni constant?

For $n=60$, the root is about $-0.580$; for $n=120$, the root is about $-0.577$. That's as far as I've gone.

(If the question seems unmotivated, I'll give some background, though it might not help anyone find an answer. One way to think about the "values" of certain divergent series is to view them as fixed points of an associated function; e.g., for the series $1+2+4+8+\dots$, the linear map $x \mapsto 2x+1$ sends the sum of the first $n$ terms of the series to the sum of the first $n+1$ terms, and the fixed point of this map is $-1$, which is indeed the natural value to assign to the divergent series. The problem I'm posting arose from trying to analyze $1+2+3+4+\dots$ in a similar way.)

$\endgroup$
2
  • 11
    $\begingroup$ Quick computer check suggests that the absolute value of this root is strictly decreasing, and in fact dropping below $\gamma$ as early as $n=107$. Around $n=1000$ it's roughly $-0.5742$. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 2, 2023 at 6:07
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ One more empirical observation: Denote the root of $p_n(x)-x$ in question by $x_n$, then the sequence of $|x_{2^{n+1}}-x_{2^n}|$ seems very nearly proportional to $\frac{1}{2^n}$ (i.e., approximately halving each time), allowing a decent guess for the eventual limit to be $\approx -0.57382\dots$ $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 2, 2023 at 9:21

3 Answers 3

18
$\begingroup$

The below answer consists of two parts. At first, we prove that each $p_n(z)-z$ has the unique negative root. Next, we describe the limit as the negative root of a certain function.

Denote $x_k=k(k-1)/2$ for $k=1,2,\ldots$.

Note that $p_n(z)-z$ interpolates the function $\varphi(z):=\sqrt{2z+1/4}+1/2$ at points $x_1,\ldots,x_{n+1}$.

  1. Proving that $p_n(z)-z$ has the unique negative root. Fix $n$ throughout this section, and denote $f(z)=p_n(z)-z$. I claim that $f(z)=1+a_1z+a_2z^2+\ldots+a_n z^n$ where $a_i(-1)^{i-1}>0$. (Then the function $f(-t)$ obviously decreases for $t\geqslant 0$ and has the unique positive root, as needed.) To prove this, assume that on the contrary $a_k(-1)^{k-1}\leqslant 0$ for certain $k\in \{1,2,\ldots,n\}$. Since the function $f-\varphi$ has $n+1$ positive roots, by Rolle's theorem the function $\eta(x):=f^{(k)}(x)-\varphi^{(k)}(x)$ has at least $n+1-k$ distinct positive roots. Note that $(-1)^{(k-1)}\varphi^{(k)}(x)>0$ for all $x>-1/8$. Then, since we assumed $(-1)^{k-1}f^{(k)}(0)\leqslant 0$, we get $(-1)^{(k-1)}\eta(x)<0$. But $(-1)^{(k-1)}\eta(-1/8+0)=+\infty$. Hence $\eta$ has a root on $(-1/8,0)$. Totally, $\eta$ has at least $n+2-k$ roots on $(-1/8,+\infty)$, and $\eta^{(n+1-k)}=-\varphi^{(n+1)}$ has a root on $(-1/8,+\infty)$ again by Rolle. A contradiction.

  2. How to find the limit of negative roots. Let $\gamma_n$ be any simple closed contour (oriented counterclockwise) on the complex plane containing all $x_1,\ldots,x_{n+1}$ inside but $-1/8$ outside. Then we may consider $\varphi$ as an analytic function inside $\gamma_n$.

Denoting $H_n(z)=\prod_{k=1}^{n+1} (z-x_k)$, we get by Lagrange interpolation for any $z$ outside $\gamma_n$: $$ p_n(z)-z=H_n(z)\sum_{k=1}^{n+1}\varphi(x_k) \frac{1}{(z-x_k)H_n'(x_k)}= H_n(z)\sum_{k=1}^{n+1}{\rm res}_{w=x_k}\frac{\varphi(w)}{(z-w)H_n(w)}\\ =\frac1{2\pi i} H_n(z)\int_{\gamma_n} \frac{\varphi(w)}{(z-w)H_n(w)}dw. $$ It is more convenient to renormalize now $H_n$: namely, denote $$G_n(z):=z(1-z/x_2)\ldots (1-z/x_{n+1})=(-1)^{n}(x_2\ldots x_{n+1})^{-1}H_n(z).$$ The roots of $p_n(z)-z$ are the same as those of $$q_n(z):=\int_{\gamma_n}\frac{\varphi(w)}{(z-w)G_n(w)}dw. $$ For $z<0$ choose $\gamma_n=[-\varepsilon-iR,-\varepsilon+iR]$ plus the corresponding right semicircle for large $R$. The integral over the semicircle tends to 0, thus $$q_n(z)=-\int_{-\varepsilon-i\infty}^{\varepsilon+i\infty}\frac{\varphi(w)}{(z-w)G_n(w)}dw.$$ Denote by $$G(z):=z(1-z/x_2)(1-z/x_3)\ldots $$ the infinite product. It is an entire function, and $G_n$ converge to $G$ uniformly on compact sets. I claim that $q_n$ converge to $$ q(z):=-\int_{-\varepsilon-i\infty}^{-\varepsilon+i\infty}\frac{\varphi(w)}{(z-w)G(w)}dw=-\frac1{\pi i z}+v.p. \int_{-i\infty}^{+i\infty}\frac{\varphi(w)}{(z-w)G(w)}dw $$ uniformly on compact subsets of $(-\infty,-\varepsilon)$. Indeed, this is clear for the integral over any segment $[-\varepsilon-iR,-\varepsilon+iR]$ for a fixed $R$, and for complement of this segment on the line $-\varepsilon+i\mathbb{R}$ we may note that all multiples $1-z/x_k$ have absolute values at least 1, so we may bound from above (in absolute value) the integrand $\frac{\varphi(w)}{(z-w)G_n(w)}$ by $\frac{|\varphi(w)|}{|(z-w)w}$ which is summable on this vertical line (even uniformly in $z$), so if $R$ is large enough, the integral over $|\Im w|>R$ is small uniformly for all $n$.

I guess that $q(z)$ has a negative root $z_0$ and changes the sign passing through $z_0$ (that would follow from $q(0)$ and $q(-\infty)$ having different sign that looks provable via convergence $q_n\to q$, although some details must be completed), then, the negative roots of $q_n$ must converge to $z_0$ (since for arbitrary $a<z_0<b<0$ we have $q_n(b)q_n(a)<0$ for large $n$, so $q_n$ has a root on $(a,b)$.

$\endgroup$
12
$\begingroup$

In this answer, I'll give an explicit formula for the interpolating polynomial and their limit. As a result, I'll conclude that

(1) $p_k(x)-x$ is increasing as a function of $x$ on $(-\infty, 0]$, with $p_k(0)=1$, so $p_k(x)$ has a unique negative root $x_k$ and

(2) $p_k(x)-x$ is decreasing as a function of $k$ for $x$ fixed in $(-\infty, 0)$, so $x_k$ is increasing. Thus, $\lim_{k \to \infty} x_k$ exists, and Joachim Konig's computations show that the limit cannot be $-\gamma$.

First, though, we make some changes of variables. Put $q_n(x) = p_n(x)-x$, so $q_n(\tfrac{k(k-1)}{2}) = k$ for $1 \leq k \leq n+1$, you want to solve $q_n(x)=0$.

Put $r_n(z) = 2 q_n(\tfrac{z^2-1}{8})-1$. So $r_n(2k-1) = 2k-1$ for $1 \leq k \leq n+1$ and we want to solve $r_n(z)=-1$ for $z$ imaginary. Since $r_n(z)$ is a polynomial in $z^2$, it is an even function, so we have $r_n(z) = |z|$ for $z \in \{ -(2n+1), -(2n-1), \ldots, -3,-1,1,3, \ldots, 2n-1, 2n+1 \}$. The things we want to show about $r_n$ are

(1) $r_n(iy)$ is decreasing as a function of $y \in [0,\infty)$ and

(2) $r_n(iy)$ is decreasing as a function of $n$ for $y \in [0,\infty)$.

With those preliminaries out of the way, here is our formula for $r_n$: $$r_n(z) = 1- \sum_{k=1}^n \frac{1}{2k-1} \prod_{j=1}^k \frac{(2j-1)^2 - z^2}{(2j)^2}. \qquad (\ast)$$

Thus, $$r_n(iy) = 1- \sum_{k=1}^n \frac{1}{2k-1} \prod_{j=1}^k \frac{(2j-1)^2 + y^2}{(2j)^2}.$$ From this formula, properties (1) and (2) are clear.

I was going to write up a proof of $(\ast)$, but it got pretty long. The conceptual point is that $r_n(z-2) - 2 r_n(z) + r_n(z+2)$ is a polynomial of degree $2n-2$ vanishing at $\{ \pm 3, \pm 5, \ldots, \pm (2n-1) \}$, so it must be $c \prod_{j=2}^{n-1} ((2j-1)^2 - z^2)$ for some $c$, and we can evaluate $c$ by plugging in $z=1$. Then I have to unwind to get $r_n(z)$ itself, which is a pain.


Fedor Petrov, in comments, suggests a better approach to proving $(\ast)$. It is enough to show that $r_n(2m+1)=2m+1$ for $0 \leq m \leq n$. All the terms which differ between $r_n(2m+1)$ and $r_m(2m+1)$ are $0$, so it is enough to check that $r_{2m+1}(2m+1)=2m+1$. Fedor simplifies $r_{2m+1}(2m+1)$ to $$\sum_{k=0}^m \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{2k-1} \frac{(m+k)!}{k! k! (m-k)!} = \sum_{k=0}^m \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{2k-1} \binom{2k}{k} \binom{m+k}{2k}.$$ We can drop the upper bound of the sum, since $\binom{m+k}{2k}=0$ for $k>m$.

We use Wilf's "snake oil method": $$\sum_{m=0}^{\infty} x^m \sum_k \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{2k-1} \binom{2k}{k} \binom{m+k}{2k} = \sum_k \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{2k-1} \binom{2k}{k} \sum_{m=0}^{\infty} \binom{m+k}{2k} x^m$$ $$=\sum_k \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{2k-1} \binom{2k}{k} \frac{x^k}{(1-x)^{2k+1}}. \quad (\dagger)$$ We have $$\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{2k-1} \binom{2k}{k} y^k = \sqrt{1+4y}$$ so $$(\dagger) = \frac{1}{1-x} \sqrt{1+\tfrac{4x}{(1-x)^2}} = \frac{1}{1-x} \frac{1+x}{1-x} = \frac{1+x}{(1-x)^2}.$$ The Taylor series of $\tfrac{1+x}{(1-x)^2}$ is $1+3x+5x^2+\cdots$ so, extracting the coefficient of $x^m$, we prove the result.


Finally, we note that $$\frac{(2j-1)^2 -z^2}{(2j)^2} = 1 - 1/j + O(1/j^2)$$ for bounded $z$, so $$\frac{1}{2k-1} \prod_{j=1}^k \frac{(2j-1)^2 - z^2}{(2j)^2} = O(1/k^2).$$ Thus, if we extend the sum $(\ast)$ to an infinite sum, it will converge uniformly on compact sets, and we get an entire function $$\phi(z):=1- \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2k-1} \prod_{j=1}^k \frac{(2j-1)^2 - z^2}{(2j)^2}.$$

I've done a little experimenting. If you believe in Mathematica's ability to evaluate infinite sums, then $\phi(0) = 2/\pi$. Numerically, $\phi(z)$ seems to be very close to $$\sqrt{z^2 + \tfrac{4}{\pi^2} \cos^2 \tfrac{\pi z}{2}},$$ but I don't think they are actually equal.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ But if you have a formula for $r_n$, then for proving it you may just check the values $r_n(2k-1)=2k-1$, which should not be hard $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 2, 2023 at 16:17
  • $\begingroup$ (it is equivalent to a binomial identity $\sum_{k=0}^n (-1)^{k+1}\frac1{2k-1}{n+k\choose k,k,n-k}=2n+1$) $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 2, 2023 at 17:18
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! Should I know how to prove that? My first thought is to integrate $\sum_k (-1)^{k+1} \binom{n+k}{k,k,n-k} x^{2k-2}$; Mathematica tells me that the latter is ${}_2 F_1(-n,1+n;1; x^2)/x^2$, and Wikipedia tells me that ${}_2 F_1(-n,1+n;1; z)$ is a Jacobi polynomial at $\alpha=\beta =0$, but I don't know where to go from there. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 2, 2023 at 17:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ well, we can, for example, induct on $n$. Denoting $(-1)^{k+1}\frac1{2k-1}{n+k\choose k,k,n-k}=f(n,k)$, and the sum over $k$ by $s(n)$, we get $s(n+2)-2s(n+1)+s(n)=\sum_k g(n,k)$, where $g(n,k)=(-1)^{k+1}\frac1{2k-1}{2k\choose k}({n+k+2\choose 2k}-2{n+k+1\choose 2k}+{n+k\choose 2k})=(-1)^{k+1}\frac1{2k-1}{2k\choose k}{n+k\choose 2k-2}=2(-1)^{k+1}({2k-2\choose k-1}-{2k-2\choose k}){n+k\choose 2k-2}$, and we have two Chu-Vandermondes $\sum {x+y\choose a}=\sum{x\choose k}{y\choose a-k}$ (with negative $x$, like $x=-n-1$, and positive $y$, like $y=n$). $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 2, 2023 at 18:51
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ FWIW the identity is a special case of Saalschütz's theorem, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/… $\endgroup$
    – Ira Gessel
    Commented Mar 3, 2023 at 19:14
8
$\begingroup$

According to Mathematica your polynomials satisfy the recurrence relation $$ (2 n+1) p(n) \left(n^2+3 n-2 x+2\right)+p(n+1) \left(-4 n^3-18 n^2+4 n x-27 n+2 x-14\right)+(2 n+3) (n+2)^2 p(n+2)=0 $$ with initial conditions $p_1=1+2x,p_2=1-x(x-13)/6$. The solution to this equation is $$ p_n(x)=\frac{1}{4} \left(\frac{\Gamma \left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right) \cos \left(\frac{1}{2} \pi \sqrt{8 x+1}\right) \Gamma \left(n+\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{8 x+1}+\frac{3}{2}\right) \Gamma \left(n-\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{8 x+1}+\frac{3}{2}\right) \, _4\tilde{F}_3\left(1,n+\frac{1}{2},n-\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{8 x+1}+\frac{3}{2},n+\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{8 x+1}+\frac{3}{2};n+\frac{3}{2},n+2,n+2;1\right)}{\pi }+2 \, _3F_2\left(-\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{8 x+1},\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{8 x+1}+\frac{1}{2};\frac{1}{2},1;1\right)+4 x+2\right) $$

For $n\to\infty$, Mathematica claims that this becomes $$ p_\infty(x)=\frac{1}{2} \left(\, _3F_2\left(-\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{8 x+1},\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{8 x+1}+\frac{1}{2};\frac{1}{2},1;1\right)+2 x+1\right) $$ which solves $p(x)=x$ at around $$ x=-0.573825523080029241015952733\dots $$

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ The first identity can be written as $(p(n+2)-p(n+1))(2n+3)(n+2)^2=(p(n+1)-p(n))(2n+1)(n^2+3n-2x+2)$, so a multiplicative telescope first yields a closed form of $p(n+1)-p(n)$, and then an additive telescope gives $p(n)$. This would give an alternative proof of David Speyer's explicit formula. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 3, 2023 at 16:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm legitimately a bit surprised that Mathematica wasn't able to simplify e.g. $(\sqrt{8x+1}-1)^2(\sqrt{8x+1}+1)^2$ to $64x^2$. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 3, 2023 at 17:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @StevenStadnicki I asked Mathematica to try a little harder and it found a simpler expression. Thanks! $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 3, 2023 at 18:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @StevenStadnicki Mathematica is very cautious about assuming that two square roots have the same choice of sign; you usually have to twist its arm a bit. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 6, 2023 at 17:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .